There are plenty of home remedies that can alleviate your symptoms and get you back to normal. If you still feel sick after a few weeks, make an appointment with your doctor. If you have trouble breathing, have a rapid heartbeat, feel faint, or experience other severe symptoms, get medical help sooner.

Keep reading to see what cold and flu remedies you can conjure up at home.

Chicken soup

Chicken soup may not be a cure-all, but it’s a great choice when you’re sick. Research suggests that enjoying a bowl of chicken soup with vegetables, prepared from scratch or warmed from a can, can slow the movement of neutrophils in your body. Neutrophils are a common type of white blood cell. They help protect your body from infection. When they’re moving slowly, they stay more concentrated in the areas of your body that require the most healing.

The study found that chicken soup was effective for reducing the symptoms of upper respiratory infections in particular. Low-sodium soup also carries great nutritional value and helps keep you hydrated. It’s a good choice, no matter how you’re feeling.

Ginger

The health benefits of ginger root have been touted for centuries, but now we have scientific proof of its curative properties. A few slices of raw ginger root in boiling water may help soothe a cough or sore throat. Research suggests that it can also ward off the feelings of nausea that so often accompany influenza. For example, one study found that just 1 gram of ginger can “alleviate clinical nausea of diverse causes.”

Honey

Honey has a variety of antibacterial and antimicrobial properties. Drinking honey in tea with lemon can ease sore throat pain. Research suggests that honey is an effective cough suppressant, too. In one study, researchers found that giving children 10 grams of honey at bedtime reduced the severity of their cough symptoms. The children reportedly slept more soundly, which also helps reduce cold symptoms.

You should never give honey to a child younger than 1 year old, as it often contains botulinum spores. While they’re usually harmless to older children and adults, infants’ immune systems aren’t able to fight them off.

Garlic

Garlic contains the compound allicin, which may have antimicrobial properties. Adding a garlic supplement to your diet might reduce the severity of cold symptoms. According to some research, it might even help you avoid getting sick in the first place.

More research needs to be done on the potential cold-fighting benefits of garlic. In the meantime, adding more garlic to your diet probably won’t hurt.

Echinacea

Native Americans have used the herb and root of the echinacea plant to treat infections for more than 400 years. Its active ingredients include flavonoids, chemicals that have many therapeutic effects on the body. For example, flavonoids can boost your immune system and reduce inflammation.

Research on the herb’s effectiveness at fighting the common cold and flu has been mixed. But one review suggests that taking echinacea may lower your risk of developing the common cold by more than 50 percent. It may also reduce the length of a cold. If you’re a healthy adult, consider taking 1 to 2 grams of echinacea root or herb as a tea, three times daily, for no longer than one week.

Vitamin C

Vitamin C plays an important role in your body and has many health benefits. Along with limes, oranges, grapefruits, leafy greens, and other fruits and vegetables, lemons are a good source of vitamin C. Adding fresh lemon juice to hot tea with honey may reduce phlegm when you’re sick. Drinking hot or cold lemonade may also help.

While these drinks may not clear up your cold entirely, they can help you get the vitamin C that your immune system needs. Getting enough vitamin C can relieve upper respiratory tract infections and other illnesses.

Probiotics

Probiotics are “friendly” bacteria and yeast that are found in your body, some foods, and supplements. They can help keep your gut and immune system healthy, and research indicates that probiotics may reduce your chance of getting sick with an upper respiratory infection.

For a delicious and nutritious source of helpful bacteria, include probiotic yogurt in your diet. Besides its potential benefits for your immune system, yogurt is a healthy snack that provides plenty of protein and calcium. Look for products that list live bacteria on the label.

Other options

Salt water

Gargling with salt water may help prevent upper respiratory infections. It may also decrease the severity of cold symptoms. For example, it may ease sore throat pain and nasal congestion.

Gargling with salt water reduces and loosens mucus, which contains bacteria and allergens. To try this remedy at home, dissolve 1 teaspoon of salt in a full glass of water. Swish it around your mouth and throat. Then spit it out.

Vapor rub

You might not like the smell, but some old-fashioned topical ointments, such as vapor rub, appear to reduce cold symptoms in children older than 2 years. Just one or two applications before bed can help open air passages to combat congestion, reduce coughing, and improve sleep. Vapor rub is gaining traction among some doctors who encourage parents to avoid giving over-the-counter cold medicines to young children because of unwanted side effects.

Humidity

Influenza thrives and spreads more easily in dry environments. Creating more humidity in your home may reduce your exposure to this flu-causing virus. Increased humidity may also reduce nasal inflammation, making it easier to breathe when you’re sick. Temporarily adding a cool mist humidifier to your bedroom may help you feel more comfortable. This is especially true in winter, when dry indoor heat can exacerbate your symptoms. Adding a few drops of eucalyptus oil might also stimulate your breathing.

Remember, the water used in humidifiers needs to be changed daily to stop mold and other fungi from growing. For the same effect without a humidifier, take a long shower or linger in a steamy bathroom.

Warm baths

Sometimes you can reduce a child’s fever by giving them a warm sponge bath. Warm baths can also reduce cold and flu symptoms in adults. Adding Epsom salt and baking soda to the water can reduce body aches. Adding a few drops of essential oil, such as tea tree, juniper, rosemary, thyme, orange, lavender, or eucalyptus, may also have a soothing effect.

Learn more

There are many ways that people treat their cold and flu symptoms with home remedies. Some of those remedies may seem a bit weird, but there are people and communities that swear by their effectiveness. To learn more about the oddest options out there, check out the weirdest cold treatments from around the world.

If you want to avoid getting sick altogether, you should proactively boost your immune system. For that, learn our secrets to never getting sick.

This article was condensed from an article in HealthLine for Dee Jensen

An allergy is when your immune system reacts to a foreign substance, called an allergen. It could be something you eat, inhale into your lungs, inject into your body or touch. This reaction could cause coughing, sneezing, itchy eyes, a runny nose and a scratchy throat. In severe cases, it can cause rashes, hives, low blood pressure, breathing trouble, asthma attacks and even death.

There is no cure for allergies. You can manage allergies with prevention and treatment. More Americans than ever say they manage allergies. It is among the country’s most common, but overlooked, diseases.

How Many People Do Allergies Affect?

Researchers think nasal allergies affect about 50 million people in the United States.

Allergies are increasing. They affect as many as 30 percent of adults and 40 percent of children.

Allergies are the 6th leading cause of chronic illness in the U.S.

How Many People Get Sick from Allergies?

Allergic conditions are the most common health issues affecting children in the U.S.

In 2015, 8.2% of adults and 8.4% of children were diagnosed with hay fever.

People visit the emergency room about 200,000 times each year because of food allergies. Almost 10,000 people stay in the hospital each year because of food allergies.

How Many People Die from Allergies?

The most common triggers for anaphylaxis, a life-threatening reaction, are medicines, food and insect stings. Medicines cause the most allergy related deaths.

African-Americans and the elderly have the deadliest reactions to medicines, food or unknown allergens.

What Are the Costs of Allergies?

Annual cost of allergies exceeds $18 billion.

Food allergies cost about $25 billion each year.

What Are Indoor and Outdoor Allergies?

Types of indoor and outdoor allergies include sinus swelling, seasonal and returning allergies, hay fever and nasal allergies. Many people with allergies often have more than one type of allergy. The most common indoor/outdoor allergy triggers are: tree, grass and weed pollen, mold spores, dust mites, cockroaches, and cat, dog and rodent dander.

Immunotherapy (allergy shots) helps reduce hay fever symptoms in about 85% of people with allergic rhinitis.

Allergic rhinitis affects 6.1 million of the children population and 20 million of the adult population.2

In 2015, white children were more likely to have hay fever than African-American children.

The same triggers for indoor/outdoor allergies also often cause eye allergies.

Cell and transmission towers are strong sources of electrosmog. Largely placed on rooftops, they emit radio frequency radiation that threatens our health.

Today, electrosmog is on everyone’s mind because of its harmful side effects. It’s no wonder that this is the case since its intensity increases on a near-daily basis. The current implementation of new LTE/4G data transfer frequencies marks one more step in a direction that makes more and more people sick. This illness is often referred to as Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Syndrome (EHS).

We are constantly exposed to electromagnetic influences because each molecule, each atomic particle, has an electromagnetic field. The Sun and the Earth also produce electromagnetic fields. Four generations ago these electromagnetic fields were harmless to us: either they were too weak to influence us or they were life-supporting, like sunlight.

However, with the development of electric power and all of its modern manifestations, our natural environment has evolved into a tightly woven network of multiple radiating sources. We refer to this excessive density of radiation as “electrosmog.” Invisible, inaudible and noticeable only to very few people, electrosmog has become a constant threat to our health.

Electrosmog results from the accumulation of different electromagnetic influences in one area. A single source of radiation, such as a bedside lamp, generates an electromagnetic field that may be potentially harmful, but alone is not electrosmog. However, stronger sources of radiation, such as Wi-Fi routers and Smartphones, do create electrosmog even by themselves.

A combination of sources could also be problematic: a clock radio, TV, and a cordless phone in one room at the same time would generate electrosmog. High intensity radiation coming from cell towers, mobile phones, cordless phones (DECT radiation), utility meters, power lines, and even the wireless technology of a neighbor’s apartment or house exponentially increases the amount of electrosmog in your home.

The most significant Electrosmog Fields:

High-frequency alternating (AC) fields

High-frequency alternating fields penetrate walls and cannot be switched off. They always have a transmitter that generates them. However, they do not need a receiver to have an effect on you.

Examples of these fields include:

Mobile/Cell phones (GSM, UMTS, LTE etc.)

Mobile/Cell phone towers

Cordless Telephone (DECT) radiation

Microwave ovens

Wi-Fi (Wireless internet)

Bluetooth

Radar

CB radio

GPS

In 2011, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)classified electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless phone use” (WHO/IARC Press Release 208, May 31, 2011). While they didn’t classify it as a “known carcinogen,” it’s important to remember that such classification often takes decades—or longer.

Any one that intensively researches the topic will come across two main explanations for the harmfulness of electrosmog:

Physical irritation and electrosmog

Human beings have an electromagnetic field with a power of approximately one hundred millivolts. If we live in an artificially created field higher than this, over time our bodies become irritated and distressed because they need to compensate for the effects of this greater electromagnetic field. In order to compensate, our bodies lose energy constantly.

The strength of our body current is described as being four Pico Amps. In contrast, the current surging through mobile/cellular and cordless phones is 0.2 Amps. This is fifty billion times stronger. If you take into account that the human body performs one quadrillion electrical connections every second, it becomes clear how much can go wrong.

Hormones and electrosmog

One of the ways in which EMFs affect our bodies is by altering the production of hormones essential to our immune system function, circadian rhythms, and overall health. Studies have shown that electrosmog in bedrooms causes a decrease in melatonin, one of these essential hormones. In some cases data show more than a 50% decrease in normal melatonin levels (Bioinitiative report 2012).

Melatonin, which the pineal gland produces only at night, is responsible for complete relaxation and sleep, strengthens the immune system, and protects us from the cell-damaging effects of free radicals. In order for us to achieve deep sleep, our brain frequency needs to be 4-8 Hz, yet electromagnetic frequencies consistently interfere with this.

Research has also shown that consistently low melatonin levels increase the likelihood of cancer and can cause existing tumors to develop at an increased rate. As Wilson and Anderson write in “ELF Electromagnetic Field Effects on the Pineal Gland,”

“Pineal Function might be linked to the etiology of cancer in at least three fundamental ways:

First, melatonin itself is oncostatic and appears to be a humoral factor that inhibits the proliferation of certain cancer cells.

Second, melatonin enhances certain facets of the immune response, again possibly helping to protect against the development of cancers.

Third, melatonin functions as an inhibitor of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis. As such, it may reduce the availability of hormones that are required for the growth of certain hormone-dependent breast, ovarian, and prostate cancers.” (Wilson and Anderson, 1990, 167-168)

Russel J. Reiter and Jo Robinson’s book, Melatonin, is also an invaluable source of information. In it, the authors document the correlation between electrosmog and reduced melatonin production.

Is electrosmog noticeable?

Very few people feel the presence of electrosmog. It is invisible and its effects subtle. But now there are more and more sufferers, which react to high-frequency radiation, primarily, with physical pains. In almost all cases, the sensitivity begins with a dull feeling in the head, dizziness and lack of concentration.

Is electrosmog affecting you?

Many people don’t make the connection between the physical and mental symptoms of exposure to electrosmog and the source itself. This is not only because it’s invisible but because it is a constant in our lives.

If you take the time to be aware of how you feel in different environments, however, you may see a correlation between how much you’re exposed and how you feel. Take the time, for example, to see how you feel over a period of time in a big city (high levels of exposure) versus how you feel in the country away from cell towers, Wi-Fi, high tension lines, and other sources of electrosmog.

These days more and more people suffer from the effects of high intensity radiation. In almost all cases, sensitivity begins with a dull feeling in the head, dizziness, and lack of concentration. Sensitivity may also manifest as physical pain.

While you can’t see electrosmog there are meters, which you can use to measure levels of radiation in homes, workplaces, and other areas. There are also some simple things you can take into account when considering how much you’re exposed. For example, do I live or work near a cell phone tower, power station, or high voltage lines? What devices do I have in my house? Do I have Wi-Fi, cordless phones, baby monitors, etc.? Do I use a microwave oven?

Unfortunately, these days low-frequency electrosmog is built into all buildings. Additionally, high-frequency electrosmog exists not only in most apartments and houses, but also in nature. In fact, the ever-increasing number of cell phone towers and equipment used for transmission means that it exists almost everywhere.

What types of electrosmog are particularly harmful?

High-frequency radiation fields created by cellular and cordless phones, cellular phone towers, Wi-Fi, and microwaves are the most damaging. But low frequency electrosmog can also be harmful when we are exposed to it consistently.

The late American scientist Nancy Wertheimer conducted extensive research focusing on the impact of low frequency electromagnetic fields on child mortality. Her research proves a correlation between a higher child mortality rate and consistent exposure to low frequency fields.

In her studies, children who slept in the vicinity of transformer stations or similar facilities were two to three times more likely to die of leukemia than children who slept in bedrooms free from this type of electromagnetic field. Additionally, children who lived within a radius of 50 meters from a high-voltage pylon developed leukemia at a higher rate than children who did not—up to 70% higher.

At what point does exposure to electrosmog become harmful?

The government has established maximum exposure limits, which they say, must not be exceeded.

These limits, however, are unrealistically high and, we suspect, sacrifice our safety in order to cater to corporate, industrial and political interests. The guidelines of Building Biologists, which are well below governmentally established limits, provide a more reasonable and realistic idea of how much exposure remains safe.

According to the guidelines for sleeping areas, electrical fields in excess of 5V/m and magnetic fields in excess of 100 nT are harmful to your health. However, many households exceed the limits provided by this alternative model.

How can I avoid electrosmog?

Although it is difficult to avoid electrosmog, there are some simple measures you can take which will effectively reduce electrosmog in your home. You may be able to implement these same measures in your work environment as well.

Buy a landline phone

Get rid of your microwave oven

Connect to the internet using a cable connection instead of Wi-Fi

Get rid of any electrical cords near (or under) your bed

Followup Steps:

There are some harmonization systems available that may help alleviate the problem. If you are interested, check out Swiss Harmony’s harmonization products as an example.Please read more here.

This article was condensed from Swissharmony.com for Dee Jensen.

]]>Signs of Allergieshttp://hearttoheartmessages.com/signs-of-allergies/
Wed, 03 Jan 2018 20:22:49 +0000http://hearttoheartmessages.com/?p=956Allergies are simply caused be an overactive immune system once triggered by an ‘allergen.’ Allergies can, of course, be seasonal or perennial. Once exposed to an allergen, whether it is pollen or wheat, your body begins to produce histamine. Once this chemical is released, individuals often experience a number of signs and symptoms. If you experience the following signs, it’s recommended that you get tested immediately. This will help you better understand the severity, as well as the cause.

Watery Sensitive Eyes

When exposed to a certain allergen, it’s possible that it will cause your eyes to become irritated and itchy. Although allergens such as mold, dust, pollen, and pet dander are common causes, while food allergies and even bee stings can affect your eyes. An eye allergen is also known as allergic conjunctivitis and contributes to the discomfort you experience. Once histamine is released, this is what influences issues with your eyes. You may experience puffy eyes, swollen eyelids, tearing, itching, redness, and burning.

Scratchy Throat

A scratchy or sore throat can be caused by an allergy-induced postnatal drip. Once exposed to an allergen, your sinuses may begin to drain, resulting in a scratchy discomfort.

Your body is simply increasing its mucus production, which is why you may also experience a runny nose. Although the mucus itself does not generally cause pain, a sore throat is often experienced because individuals try to clear the mucus, resulting in burning and discomfort. To soothe a sore throat, gargle warm salt water and drink plenty of fluids.

Skin Rash

A skin rash can be caused by a wide range of factors, including exposure to certain plants or even a reaction to a food. Two of the most common skin rashes are eczema and hives, which can easily be brought on by allergens. Once histamine is released, blood plasma begins to leak out of your skin’s blood vessels.

If you experience any rash on your skin, it’s important to have it examined. If you experience a chronic rash, this could be an indication of something more severe. For those who are prone to rashes, avoid itching problematic areas. This can expose open areas to bacteria, causing minor infections.

Swelling

If you react to an allergen by swelling, this can be dangerous. In some cases, your throat and lungs could be at risk, reducing your ability to breathe. In most cases, severe swelling occurs due to insect bites, food allergies, a reaction to medication, or pet dander.

If you notice that your fingers, tongue, and lips begin to swell, you may be having a reaction. If you notice that your throat is swelling, call an ambulance and take an antihistamine if possible. If this has happened before, it’s important to discuss emergency options with your doctor – such as an EpiPen or an inhaler for future use.

Vomiting

More often than not, vomiting will occur due to a food allergy. In most cases, vomiting will be effortless, based on your body’s natural reflux. When suffering from a food allergy, for instance, your immune response will be oversensitive.

Some of the most common allergens include eggs, fish, milk, nuts, soy, shellfish, and wheat. You may also experience stomach cramps and diarrhea. If you notice that a certain food bothers you, to the point that symptoms surface, avoid that food until you’ve been properly tested.

Runny Nose

As mentioned, allergens can cause postnatal drip as your body produces more mucus. An allergic reaction may be followed by excessive sneezing, a runny nose, or stuffy nose.

Basically, an allergen will increase inflammation and the release of histamine. You will know that you have allergies and not a cold because you will generally feel the most irritation within your eyes and throat. If you’re concerned, seek medical attention and ask for a patch test to be administered.

Abdominal Pain

If you often experience abdominal pain after eating, you may suffer from a food allergy or intolerance. It’s important to better understand why you’re having this reaction, as your immune system is creating an undesirable response.

If a certain food cannot be digested or causes irritation, this is more than likely an intolerance. This is often experienced when people cannot digest lactose or gluten. If you suffer from any abnormal stomach pain, it’s critical that you speak to your doctor – especially if it’s severe.

Fatigue

If you are always tired, there are a number of possible reasons why. You could be persistently dehydrated, sleep deprived, nutrient deficient, and more. The truth is, if you seem to be tried for three or four months straight, you could be suffering from allergy-induced chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS).

Although researchers are still trying to uncover what the exact cause is, it’s been found that more than half of those with CFS, also have allergies. An over-reactive immune system may be causing symptoms of fatigue.

Irritability and Depression

Multiple studies have found a connection between mood swings and allergens. For those who suffer from allergies, you may not be sleeping well. In turn, many become irritable. It’s now believed that depressive symptoms may be triggered by inflammation in the body.

As cytokines are released, it’s said that serotonin decreases, which is our ‘feel-good’ hormone. When it comes to allergies, they do not necessarily cause depression, but they can encourage depressive symptoms. Allergies that have been linked to mood changes are generally due to symptoms such as feeling low, fatigued, and lethargic.

Headaches

It’s been reported that up to 15 percent of Americans who suffer from allergies, also develop headaches as a common symptom. In most cases, these headaches are triggered by swelling. When the nasal passages become obstructed, this can increase skull pressure, leading to headaches.

You may experience increased pressure in your forehead, behind your eyes, along your cheeks, or even within your teeth. In more severe cases, individuals suffer from allergy-related migraines. Researchers believe this may be due to swelling of blood vessels in your head.

Summary

It is easy to see that allergies can cause many symptoms. If ignored, these symptoms can result in significant health problems, and should not be ignored. If you suspect that allergies are causing health distress to you, be sure to have a visit with your healthcare practitioner to design a plan for detecting, eliminating and alleviating health problems.

A recent study found that 85 percent of the sofas researchers tested contained flame-retardant chemicals that have been identified as carcinogens and potential neurotoxins. The stats were even worse for newer couches—those made after 2005: 93 percent of those contained chemicals that were either confirmed toxic or had not yet been tested adequately enough to know if they pose a risk. The chemicals accounted for as much as 11 percent of the weight of the foam in the cushions, they found.

Manufacturers use 3.4 billion pounds of flame-retardant chemicals in couches, insulation, carpet padding, and electronics every year to, in theory, prevent them from catching fire. But studies have found that the chemicals aren’t actually effective and only make the fumes from fires more toxic.

“Petty much everyone in the country with a couch or a chair with foam have as much as a pound of a chemical like DDT or PCB in their home,” Dr. Arlene Blum, the executive director of the Green Science Policy Institute and a coauthor of the paper, told Mother Jones. “Most people think the government protects them, and that if something’s in their couch it must be safe.” (Blum’s flame retardant work was the subject of an excellent New York Times profile in September.)

Twenty-four percent of the sofas tested positive for chlorinated Tris, a carcinogen banned from children’s clothing back in the 1970s. While no longer in baby clothes, the chemical is still relatively common in mattresses and car seats and, as this study found, your couch. The researchers also found that some of the 102 couches they tested contained PentaBDE, a chemical that the United States phased out in 2004 because, as the EPA said, the chemicals are “persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic to both humans and the environment.” But as the researchers note, most people keep their couches for an average of 15 years, meaning the older couches are still in many people’s homes.

The real problem is that the chemicals don’t stay in your couch. They end up in dust and air in your house, which is particularly problematic for children that crawl around on the floor. And for you, too, if you spend a lot of time on your couch or crawling around on your floor.

The researchers also note that it’s hard to tell if your couch contains these chemicals. If it has a label noting that it meets California’s standards for flammability of upholstered furniture—that it can resist bursting into flames for 12 seconds—then it most likely does have a bunch of chemicals in it. But 60 percent of the couches they tested that didn’t have those labels still contained the chemicals.

All of this raises interesting questions about what you should do with your couch. Blum tossed her chemical-laden furniture years ago, when she found out that she had 93 parts per million of toxic chemicals in her home, which was pretty high. After four years without the toxic furniture, she’s is now down to 3 parts per million. The Green Science Policy Institute’s primer on “cancer-free couches” is a useful place to start if you want to know more.

In collaboration with Dr. Heather Stapleton at Duke University, the study tested the foam of 101 American couches bought between 1984-2010. We found that 85% of the couches contained harmful or inadequately tested flame retardant chemicals in the foam.

TDCPP (chlorinated Tris), listed as a carcinogen by California in 2011

National Institute of Health Analysis: “Although flame retardants can offer benefits when they are added to some products, a growing body of evidence shows that many of these chemicals are associated with adverse health effects in animals and humans, including endocrine and thyroid disruption, impacts to the immune system, reproductive toxicity, cancer, and adverse effects on fetal and child development and neurologic function.“

National Institute of Health Analysis: “PBDEs are endocrine disruptors and neurotoxins. They are believed to cause liver tumors, neurodevelopmental and thyroid dysfunctions. Exposure to polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs), close molecular analogs of PBDEs, has been associated with fatigue, reduced capacity to work, increased sleep, headache, dizziness and irritability. These symptoms often appear in combination with gastrointestinal syndromes including diminished appetite, weight loss, abdominal pain and diarrhea.“

Firemaster 550,

National Institute of Health Analysis: “perinatal exposure to the flame-retardant mixture is associated with endocrine disrupting effects. The researchers observed weight gain, early onset of puberty, and cardiovascular health effects at levels that are relevant to human exposure and lower than the no observable adverse effects level reported by the manufacturer.“

Dimethyl fumarate , which was declared the Contact Allergen of the Year for 2011 by the American Contact Dermatitis Society (ACDS).

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) is a potent allergenic sensitizer that is used for its antifungal properties. The white crystalline powder is packaged into small sachets, similar to silica gel sachets used to remove moisture. While silica gel is an inert substance that removes moisture, it is not that effective in preventing mold growth in large leather items, hence the use of DMF sachets. The skin affected by the dermatitis can be severe, red, swollen, scaly and itchy. The rash is often seen on the backs of the legs, buttocks and back of patients who have sat on a DMF-contaminated couch. Hence the condition is commonly known as “sofa dermatitis”.

It is difficult to avoid DMF as products are not identified as containing the substance. Patients and doctors need to be aware of DMF allergy if unexplained skin reactions occur, particularly if a new item of furniture or clothing has been purchased recently that coincides with the dermatitis.

What to do if you suspect that you are being poisoned by your couch:

Send a Sample, Get a Test

Here is unusual service run by a Duke University lab. The lab’s offer is simple. First, the lab instructs, wield a pair of scissors. Grab something made with polyurethane foam—say, a mattress or the innards of a couch cushion. Cut a small chunk from the foam. Wrap the surgical work in tinfoil, ziplock seal it and mail the crime-scene-looking evidence off to Durham, North Carolina. Wait up to 45 days, the lab said, and it’ll arrive: a report detailing toxic flame retardants embedded in the foam.

Of course, you also might be wondering, “What do I do with my old couch?” You don’t want to create a “hand-me-down hazard,” as this Environmental Health Perspectives article sharply observes. So where we would usually be all for reusing and recycling, the answer here is that our old, toxic furniture should go to the landfill, not to the second-hand store. Ideally, it would go to a hazardous waste facility. Unfortunately, these couches’ end-of-life questions are far from resolved, but meanwhile, we should not send these toxics downstream to others of us who simply can’t afford new furniture.

This article has been synthesized from miscellaneous articles. Studies by the National Institute of Health have been cited.

]]>Dust Mites – Like An Endless Coldhttp://hearttoheartmessages.com/dust-mites-like-an-endless-cold/
Tue, 03 Oct 2017 20:54:24 +0000http://hearttoheartmessages.com/?p=941Often overlooked by allergy sufferers is their sensitivity to dust mites. Typically people sensitive to other indoor pollutants and allergens like molds are very susceptible to the allergic affects of dust mites. Generally people assume that “dust mites are everywhere” and “there’s not much you can do about them.” In a lot of situations people thought their mattress or carpeting contained high dust mite counts when in fact no significant concentrations were detected. Conversely, people who thought their bedding was dust mite proof or their carpeting was clean learned that they did in fact have high dust mite concentrations in their home.

There are many substances in household dust which can cause allergies in humans. The most common allergenic components of house dust, however, are from house dust mites. House dust mites are tiny creatures related to ticks, chiggers, and spiders, that live in close association with humans. Their primary food is dander (skin scales) shed from human and pet activity. Most homes in the United States probably have detectable levels of house dust mites and their allergy-producing fragments.

House dust mites are not parasitic nor are they capable of biting or stinging humans. Their significance as pests is due to the powerful allergens contained in the mites, their cast skins, fecal material and secretions. Symptoms of a house dust mite allergy include stuffy or runny nose, sneezing, coughing or watery eyes. Inhalation of dust mite allergens by hypersensitive individuals can result in acute attacks of bronchial asthma, accompanied by wheezing, and shortness of breath. Diagnostic tests and clinical studies by allergists have shown house dust mite to be the most common allergy in asthmatics, and an important “root cause” for the development of asthma in young children. Recent studies suggest that at least 45 percent of young people with asthma are allergic to house dust mites. Unlike “seasonal” allergies caused by molds and pollen, people who are allergic to dust mites often will have symptoms year round.

House dust mites are tiny adults are about 0.5 mm long and the immatures are even smaller. Consequently, they generally are visible only with the aid of a microscope. The mites are globular in shape, clear to creamy white in color, with hairs on their legs and body. There are two common species in the United States, the North American house dust mite, Dermatophagoides farina, and the European house dust mite, D. pteronyssinus.

Food is seldom a problem for house dust mites. Their primary food is skin scales (dander) contained in house dust. People and pets regularly shed small flakes of skin from their bodies as the skin continually renews itself. Since the greatest fallout occurs in areas of human and pet activity, the mites tend to be most numerous in beds, overstuffed sofas and chairs, and adjacent carpeted areas. Relative humidity also tends to be higher in these areas, because people perspire and exhale water vapor where they sleep and lounge. Mattresses, sofas, carpet, and other soft furnishings trap and accumulate dust, dander, and moisture, making them ideal microhabitats for mite development

There are two basic approaches to managing dust mite allergy: 1) treatment of the patient, and 2) modification of the patients’ environment to minimize exposure to the mites. An allergist may prescribe quick-relief medications and/or allergy vaccinations (immunotherapy). Immunotherapy involves injecting gradually-increasing concentrations of mite extracts over time in order to desensitize the affected individual.

The second approach often done in conjunction with patient therapy is to minimize exposure to the mites and their allergenic materials inside the home. This is not a simple process and usually requires significant effort and expense. Dust mite abatement has become a huge industry, with companies offering many products and services to allergy sufferers seeking relief from their symptoms. While some abatement measures are helpful, others are relatively ineffective or as yet unproven. Of the treatment measures discussed below, numbers 1-3 are generally considered most essential and effective, whereas the others may provide some secondary benefit.

To reduce the dust mite concentration in the home:

1) Remove or modify furnishings that accumulate dust and provide habitat for dust mites. Carpeting, upholstered furniture, drapes, curtains, stuffed toys, and other fabric-covered furnishings should be replaced with easy-to-clean items. This is especially important in bedrooms and other areas where allergy sufferers spend most of their time. Carpet is a perfect breeding ground for dust mites. If carpeting must be used, select low pile varieties. Area rugs are easier to clean than wall-to-wall carpeting. Hardwood, tile or linoleum floors are much easier to keep clean and dust-free. The same is true of wooden, leather or plastic-covered sofas and chairs. Do not allow children with dust allergies to sleep or play with stuffed, furry toys.

2) Encase mattress, box springs, and pillows in allergen-impermeable covers. Bedding is an extremely important source for dust mite development. Plastic or vinyl covers that zip around mattresses, box springs and pillows seal in allergenic materials so that they are not inhaled while sleeping. They are also easier to keep clean than cotton-based materials. Various styles of dust-proof bedding protectors are available through mattress and allergy supply stores. Many are equipped with an outer layer of material, such as nylon, to enhance comfort. Ideally, it’s best to install dust-proof protectors on new bedding items rather than those that are already laden with allergens.

3) Using “non-allergenic” pillows is not a substitute for covering them with allergy-proof encasements; non-allergenic simply means that the materials are synthetic. Moreover, the evidence is contradictory as to whether foam pillows are any less prone to dust mite allergens than are feather pillows. Use only washable bed spreads, sheets and blankets, and launder bedding weekly in hot water.

4) Attempt to lower relative humidity inside the home. House dust mites have a difficult time surviving when the relative humidity is below 50 percent. Improving ventilation and installing a dehumidifier can often help to reduce populations indoors. Since fabric-covered surfaces retain air and body moisture better than less porous materials (e.g., wood, vinyl, linoleum), removal or modification of carpets, bedding, overstuffed furniture, etc. will further help to reduce humidity and favorable habitat for dust mite development.

5) Maintain good levels of sanitation and housecleaning. Vacuuming and cleaning activities have not shown much benefit in reducing mite populations, or removing their allergenic materials (feces, cast skins, carcasses). Routine, thorough vacuuming can, however, help to remove dust, dander, and a small percentage of mites. When vacuuming is performed, it’s important to use a vacuum cleaner equipped with a HEPA (High Efficiency Particulate Arrestor) filtration system, so that the microscopic allergens are retained within the vacuum bag. Vacuum cleaners lacking this level of filtration will simply re-circulate the tiny allergenic particles back into the air, often causing even greater allergy symptoms. Emphasis should be on bedrooms, mattresses, and other locations where dust mites are likely to be living. Ideally, allergic individuals should not be the ones doing the vacuuming, nor should they be around when vacuuming is being performed. If this is not possible, they should wear a filtered breathing mask. Dusting of surfaces should be done with a damp or oiled cloth.

6) Consider the use of allergen-trapping air filters. Microscopic dust mite particles (especially feces) can remain suspended in the air for hours and be inhaled. To help remove these allergens, HEPA-grade filters can be installed in the central air conditioning and heating system of the home. HEPA filters can also be used within portable air cleaners, placed in bedrooms and other critical areas of the house.

This article is a condensation of an article in indoordoctor.

]]>Parasites & Cleanseshttp://hearttoheartmessages.com/parasites-cleanses/
Wed, 30 Aug 2017 00:08:39 +0000http://hearttoheartmessages.com/?p=918Note: This blog is a condensation of several research blogs. See additional information at the end of the article.

Intestinal parasites are very common, and they affect those living in developed countries. In fact, it’s estimated that one third or more of Americans are infected with an intestinal parasite and likely don’t even know it.

That’s because our immune system works to suppress the damaging and uncomfortable effects of these nasty parasites that come in the form of worms. These parasitic worms can hook into your intestines and feed on your blood, eat up your vitamins and nutrients, and leave you with all kinds of digestive problems. These parasites live in contaminated fruits and vegetables, undercooked meat, and contaminated water.

You can live with intestinal parasites for months and even years. You might be experiencing digestive irregularities and completely change your diet, experience bloating and acid-reflux and start taking antacids, or you might simply experience constant fatigue despite your best night’s sleep. BUT -Intestinal Parasites can, and should, be effectively cleansed from the body.

What are the Symptoms of Intestinal Parasites?

Digestive Irregularity: Constipation & Diarrhea

Bloating, Gas, Burping, and other symptoms of Irritable Bowel Syndrome

As you can see, intestinal parasites can affect almost every important bodily function. Your gut health is responsible for 70% of your immune system’s function, so when an intestinal parasite is eating your nutrients you’re likely not giving your body everything it needs to feel normal and healthy. Getting rid of parasites is possible with special cleanses for the digestive system – because the digestive system plays a key role in our mental health and overall health, a successful parasite cleanse can help you experience:

More Energy

Clearer Skin

Enhanced & Regulated Digestion

Stronger Immune System

Better Overall Health

Positive Mood

How to get rid of parasites:

One way is to start by reducing and/or eliminating sugar and starchy carbohydrates that feed parasites. Then, you could fast for more than three days to clear your colon of toxins and kickstart the immune system. Or, you could opt for an enema wherein a tube is inserted into your rectum then filled with liquid to flush out any toxic and parasitic buildup…

As you can tell, this process can be expensive, uncomfortable, and time consuming, so for those who want to start an effective parasite cleanse without flipping their lives upside down, there are some incredible natural supplements that help rid the body of digestive parasites fast. The question is – which natural digestive parasite cleanses actually work?

With any health condition, there will inevitably be a line of natural remedies created to help alleviate symptoms and build a path towards remission and health. If you look at the number of customers these companies have, the volume of verified testimonials, and the support some of their ingredients have from the medical community, they must be doing something right. These natural remedies are often used in order to avoid the cost, inconvenience, and side effects of prescription drugs and invasive treatments.

Fortunately, there are practitioners who have a passion for natural health and many of them have suffered from digestive parasites themselves. That’s why they went out and compared some of the top natural digestive parasite cleanses to see which ones really worked.

Here’s What they looked for in a Product:

The research team dove into stacks of medical journals and consumer reports and studied exactly how certain herbs can help boost liver health. They narrowed the list to 4 essential ingredients that no effective parasite cleanse would be without:

WORMWOOD: Wormwood has powerful antifungal, anti-microbial, and parasite-destroying capabilities that helps kill the adult parasite and it’s eggs. It also raises the natural stomach acidity and stimulates bile production, which can help flush out digestive parasites.

BLACK WALNUT HULLS: Black Walnut Hulls have been used in medicine for thousands of years and have well-documented parasite-killing abilities. They contain a chemical called juglone that’s antibacterial, antiviral, antiparasitic, and antifungal. It doubles as a mild laxative, so as it kills off parasites in your digestive tract, it helps you sweep them out of your system.

Cloves contains powerful bioactive compounds called eugenol and caryophyllene, an antiseptic and an antimicrobial, that travel through the bloodstream and kill microscopic parasites and – most importantly – kill the parasite’s eggs. This is why Wormwood, Black Walnut Hull, and Cloves are often considered the perfect trio of parasite-killing compounds because they attack every stage of the parasite’s life cycle.

CHANCA PIEDRA: Parasites release toxins into your system throughout their lives, and release even more as you start to kill them off. Your liver releases powerful antioxidants like glutathione to help detoxify the harmful byproducts of intestinal parasites, so it’s important to keep the liver strong and healthy so you can more completely flush these from your system. Chanca Piedra helps keep your liver strong and healthy, and has a unique hepatoprotective (liver-protective) protein that fights oxidative stress.

LIQUID FORMULA: The research team gave a heavy favoritism to liquid extracts. Studies show the body uses 98% of the liquid extract compared to only about 39-53% of a capsule or tablet, meaning the remainder of those ingredients and the money spent on them are just flushed down the toilet.Furthermore, capsules have to travel through the stomach and liver before their ingredients are even available to the body, while 87% of the liquid extract is absorbed in the first 20-30 seconds.

There are tons and tons of parasite cleanses out there, and unfortunately, most seem to be merely copycats of other parasite cleanse formulas. Our research team found that some formulas did attempt to separate themselves from their competition. And one clear winner is IntestiClear™ – Advanced Intestinal Support

]]>GMO Riskshttp://hearttoheartmessages.com/gmo-risks/
Wed, 16 Aug 2017 14:37:04 +0000http://hearttoheartmessages.com/?p=907Introduction: the genetic manipulation referred to in this article is *not* about crossing different breeds of sheep, developing various hybrids of corn, or other “within species” enhancement to improve naturally-occuring traits. Instead it’s about using a bacteria or virus to artificially insert an entirely foreign DNA into a plant’s genes, such as human genes inserted into rice, or Monsanto’s “Bt” (Bacillus thuringiensis) corn, which was genetically modified to produce a protein that ruptures the stomach when ingested by pests.

The first risk of genetic engineering is the very theory underlying its science and methods, which was brought to light by the United States National Human Genome Research Institute. All along, genetic modification has been based on a theory that one gene will express (or “code for”) one protein, and thus an organism’s genome — its total complement of DNA genes — should fully account for its unique pattern of inherited traits. However, when the Human Genome Research Project was completed in 2002, it proved this theory was not true.

The Human Genome Research Project discovered that genes operate in a complex network in ways that are still not fully understood.

The human genome has just under 25,000 genes, yet our bodies function with approximately 100,000 proteins. This is not a one-to-one ratio. There are far too few human genes to account for the complexity of our inherited traits, not to mention the vast inherited differences between plants — including the unrelated genes of the bacteria or viruses with which plants are being genetically manipulated.

Because we don’t entirely understand how genes work—as evidenced both by the Human Genome Project’s findings as well as the recent discovery of a second string of code inside DNA—the very process of genetic engineering—the random insertion of a gene into the genome—causes disruptions in many enzymes that perform basic metabolic work.

To put it simply, the Human Genome Research Project completely undermined the “science” behind genetic engineering. The whole paradigm of genetic engineering technology was based on a misunderstanding. The “Big Ag” corporations’ claims about their methods of genetically modifying food crops being “specific, precise, and predictable” are entirely untrue.

Modifying one segment of DNA does not have a single direct result; instead it can cause a spiraling effect of unintended consequences

Long before the Human Genome Research Project’s findings, a study published in 1999 in the International Journal of Biological Sciences found that inserting a gene into another organism’s DNA 1) causes thousands of activations, not just the one trait the researcher is looking for, 2) activates non-targeted (and sometimes toxic) genes; 3) affects idle genes, with entirely unknown effects; 4) lowers the plant’s nutrient content (since the plant’s energy is consumed with producing unnecessary proteins activated by the insertion).

During this same study, they also discovered some GMO crops had “superfluous” and “unsuspected” genes, including incomplete or rearranged sequences. The results of this study could not more clearly underscore what the Human Genome Research Project has been saying all along:

“Genetic engineering is an experiment in the proposition that human institutions can perform adequate risk assessments on lab-created living organisms”

So what are the inherent risks of consuming food that contains unexpected genetic behavior? What are the resulting outcomes to the crops and the environment?

The Risks of Genetic Engineering

The outward risks of genetically engineered foods fall into three categories:

1. Environmental Hazards
2. Human Health Risks
3. Economic Concerns

I. ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS

Unintended harm to other organisms

Over a decade ago, a laboratory study published in Nature showed that pollen from corn that was genetically modified to produce its own insecticide caused high mortality rates in monarch butterfly caterpillars.

But monarchs are suffering on another level: crops that are genetically engineered to resist weedkillers and the resulting increased use of weedkillers have all but exterminated milkweed—the only plant used by Monarch butterflies to lay their eggs, and Monarch caterpillars to eat. As of January 2014, the Monarch population is at its lowest point in history. And it’s not just butterflies… experts believe the dramatically decreasing populations of bees both in the United States and abroad are directly related to genetically engineered plants, their pollen, and recent studies also indicate negative honeybee impacts from the herbicide Glyphosate—the key ingredient in RoundUp, which Monsanto’s GMO crops are engineered to withstand.

It is not possible to design a B.t. toxin to be genetically engineered into corn that would only kill crop-damaging pests while remaining harmless to all other insects.

“It’s like AIDS,” says Michael McNeill — an agronomist who received his Ph.D. in quantitative genetics and plant pathology from Iowa State University in 1969 and has been a crop consultant since 1983. He was among three experts invited by county officials to testify at the August 10, 2011 meeting of the Cropland Policy Advisory Group (CPAG).

Reduced effectiveness and increased use of pesticides*Note: the term “pesticides” encompasses both insecticides and herbicides.

Just as some populations of mosquitoes developed resistance to the now-banned Monsanto insecticide DDT, insects are quickly becoming resistant to crops that have been genetically modified by Monsanto to produce their own insecticides.

Back in July 2011, the superweeds were becoming so powerful that farmers were being forced to use older, more toxic chemical sprays, more frequently and in heavier volumes, or spend extra money hiring day laborers to literally chop out the plants… some of which were reported to have stems as thick as 4 inches in diameter, growing three inches a day, and damaging conventional farm machinery. As of May 2012, farmers interviewed by the New York Times reported that weed control was “back to where we were 20 years ago.” Experts are calling the superweed epidemic “the single largest threat to production agriculture that we have ever seen,” warning that it could lead to higher food prices, lower crop yields, rising farm costs, and even greater pollution of land and water.

In summary, one of the greatest promises of the agri-bio industry — that GMO crops would reduce the use of chemicals — is sadly untrue: pesticide use has increased by 404 million pounds from the time genetically engineered crops were introduced back in 1996, to the year 2011.

Uncontrolled biological pollution

The Center for Food Safety (CFS) states the environmental impacts of GMOs will include an “uncontrolled biological pollution, threatening numerous microbial, plant and animal species with extinction, and a potential contamination of all non-genetically engineered life forms with novel and possibly hazardous genetic material.” GMO Canola is spreading via migratory birds, who eat the plants in one area, then fly and deliver “fertilized seeds” to the fields of another area. Monsanto’s telling farmers they must pull these weeds by hand, since none of Monsanto’s weed sprays are killing their own spray-resistant plants.

Studies have also shown that soil biology is negatively impacted when it’s used to grow GMO crops, once it’s in the soil, it gets into our water. The increased use of herbicides (including older, more toxic chemical “cocktails” to combat superweeds) is leaching through the soil beneath “America’s breadbasket,” where it’s drawn back up as drinking water and crop irrigation via wells. Need a complete list of glyphosate studies with sources?

Gene transfer to non-target species

Another concern is the natural cross-breeding of crops in adjacent fields, resulting in the transfer of transgenes into organic and conventional (non-genetically-engineered) crops. Monsanto came up with a solution for cross-breeding: terminator seeds. These seeds were genetically engineered to only survive for one season, thus preventing cross-contamination from one season to the next (unless the plants cross-pollinate neighboring non-GM plants prior to harvest), and forcing farmers to purchase seeds from Monsanto every year, rather than following the age-old practice of saving seeds from one harvest to plant the next. (Though their contract already stipulates that they must buy new seeds each year, this approach was thought to guarantee it.) Fortunately, Terminator Seeds have not yet been brought to market.

Monsanto postulates that buffer zones ranging from 6 to 30 meters or more would likewise inhibit gene transfer to weeds and other crops because the wind-blown pollen would not travel beyond the buffer zone (provided there are no strong winds or tornadoes). However buffer zones would still not address genetically engineered plants being transferred by migratory birds eating the seeds. And to date, few farmers have been willing to lose valuable production yields to let land go fallow in non-usable buffer zones.

2. HUMAN HEALTH RISKS

Emerging Health Risks in Human Studies

Nearly two decades after genetic engineered crops have been in your grocery store, human studies are only now starting to be performed — but not in the United States. Why is no research being done on the potential human health risks of GMOs in our country? The ag-bio companies won’t let it happen. Not surprisingly, no independent study permission has been granted in the last twenty years, except for studies that are crafted to put GMOs in a positive context. As recently as 2014, a comprehensive peer review of the Ag-Biotech industry’s so called ‘long term safety studies’ found them to be significantly inaccurate or flawed and no proof of safety.

Health Risks of Pesticides as it relates to GMOs

One study in early 2011, which was not directly aimed at GMOs and thus made it through research without hindrance, was UCSF’s sobering report about the percent of pesticides present in pregnant women in the United States… including chemicals that have been banned in our country since 1972. How does a toxic pesticide residue study relate to GMOs? Over 80% of GMO crops are engineered to either 1) resist herbicides — which enables farmers to saturate them with weedkillers during their growth period, in an effort to control the (super)weeds growing in the same fields, or 2) generate their own internal pesticides.

As stated previously, the use of pesticides has increased dramatically since the advent of genetically engineered crops. GMOs represent a double chemical dose delivered directly to your dinner table—both inside and outside of the plant. (Or triple, if you count sprayed chemicals leaching into soil and groundwater…).

But it’s not just about the toxins we’re ingesting…

Documented Proof of Modified Genes Surviving the Digestion Process

New studies are disproving one of the biggest assurances that pro-GMO manufacturers and scientists continue to make: that “new genes introduced in GM food are harmless, since all genes are broken up and rendered inert during digestion.”

The first study done in the U.K. indicates a potential release of genetically altered DNA in human digestive tracts: “the possibility of functional DNA release from plant GMOs cannot be excluded. The extent of the ability to natural transformation among intestinal bacterial species and strains is not known, although as a phenomenon natural bacterial transformation seems to be more frequent than hitherto recognised, and also intestinal pathogens might be transformable.”

A second study done in China in early 2012 was much more sobering. It showed that ingested plant microRNA — such as the genetically modified bits containing Bt — not only survive digestion, but most definitely influence human cell function. This means that DNA can code for microRNA, which can, in fact, be hazardous… having been linked for ten years to human diseases including cancer, Alzheimer’s, and diabetes.

A third study in Norway, published in July 2012, proved that GMO genes are indeed transferred through the intestinal wall into the blood. During their study they found “pieces of genetically modified DNA in large enough segments to be identified in blood, muscle tissue and liver.” Not only did that Norwegian study once again disprove the long-held “pro-GMO” claim that “new genes introduced in GM food are harmless since all genes are broken up in the intestines,” the test animals also showed increased weight gain, increased appetite, decreased immune function, an inability to properly digest proteins, as well as a different intestinal microstructure. (If this sounds like most of the U.S. population, it’s no wonder Monsanto doesn’t want labeling approved in this country.)

The most recent study done at the University of Canterbury in New Zealand reinforces the “altered genes survive digestion” theory. In this study, they found that the double stranded RNA (dsRNAs) present in genetically engineered wheat were able to withstand digestion (even after cooking) and circulate through the body, where it amplified into more and different dsRNAs and “alters gene expression in the animal.” The scientist went on to state: “The molecules created in this wheat, intended to silence wheat genes, can match human genes, and through ingestion, these molecules can enter human beings and potentially silence our genes. The findings are absolutely assured. There is no doubt that these matches exist.”

So what if these altered genes aren’t digesting, what’s the inherent risk? These studies indicate that the food we eat transfers more than just vitamins and protein to our cells. Our bodies are absorbing information, aka microRNA. What’s the purpose of microRNA? They usually function by turning down or shutting down certain genes. What genes would you like to have “turned down or turned off” in your body, without your knowledge or permission?

Documented Health Risks in Animal Studies

Long before any studies were done in humans, countless animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GMO food consumption. The association of GM foods and specific disease processes is also supported. A 2005 study by Dr. Irina Ermakova of the Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology at the Russian Academy of Sciences showed a significantly higher mortality rate in baby rats born to mothers who had consumed GM soy (chart shown above), while the surviving babies presented significantly stunted growth (photo below right).

A 2008 study linked GM corn with infertility, showing a significant decrease in offspring over time and significantly lower litter weight in mice fed GM corn. This same study found that over 400 genes were found to be expressed differently in the mice fed GM corn. These are genes known to control protein synthesis and modification, cell signaling, cholesterol synthesis, and insulin regulation. Studies also show intestinal damage in animals fed GM foods, including proliferative cell growth9 and disruption of the intestinal immune system.

In April 2012, the results of a comprehensive two year study—the first long term feeding study ever performed—were in: feeding Monsanto’s RoundUp-ready corn, as well as “acceptable levels” of RoundUp in drinking water to laboratory rats, was proven to be highly toxic to health.

The results were sobering: treated rats died 2–3 times more often than control rats, and more rapidly. Female rats developed large mammary tumors almost always more often than and before control rats; their pituitary was the second most disabled organ, and their sex hormonal balance was modified.

Meanwhile male rats suffered from liver congestions, with necrosis occurring 2.5–5.5 times more frequently. They likewise presented 4 times more large palpable tumors than control rats, and these tumors occurred up to 600 days earlier. Biochemistry data confirmed very significant kidney chronic deficiencies for all treatments and both sexes, 76% of the altered parameters were kidney related.

The overwhelming results of these studies are consistent: infertility, immune dysregulation (including upregulation of cytokines associated with asthma, allergy, and inflammation); accelerated aging; dysregulation of genes; altered structure and function of organsincluding the liver (altered lipid and carbohydrate metabolism as well as cellular changes), dysfunction in the kidney, pancreas, spleen and gastrointestinal system; stillbirths and birth defects; sterility; and cancer. Taken in total, these animal studies represent more than just a coincidental association between GM foods and adverse health effects, with causation in multiple areas including strength of association, consistency, specificity, biological gradient, and biological plausibility. When you add the data from animal studies to the data from human studies, the result clearly demonstrates a strong biological parallel between genetically engineered food and adverse health effects in humans.

When you compare this data against the health statistics in the U.S., and contrast it to the health statistics from other nations where GMOs are outlawed, there’s an even more disturbing parallel: Americans have the highest rate of cancer of any other country on the planet — 1 out of 2 men, and 1 out of 3 women are expected to get cancer in their lifetime. 1 out of 8 women has breast cancer, and only 1 in 10 of those breast cancers are inherited, which means 9 out of 10 incidences of breast cancers are environmentally triggered. The United States’ national healthcare costs are likewise far higher than any other developed nation: 16% of our GDP goes towards managing disease.

What sort of diseases have been emerging during the same timeframe that GMOs have gradually become prevalent in over 70% of the food in our grocery stores?

Increase in Food Allergies

While there have been no direct studies of the relationship between GMO crops and allergies , it is significant to note the sudden rise in food allergies during the same time period that GMO crops’ ingredients have become widely used in the majority of our food. (According to a 2005 estimate by the Grocery Manufacturers of America, 75% of all processed foods in the U.S. contain at least one genetically modified ingredient.)

The statistics began mounting in the late 1990s—again, right at the time when GMOs became mainstream in processed and fast food: the majority of children in the US now have life-threatening allergies to corn, milk, peanuts or other related GM foods; peanut allergies alone doubled from 1997 to 2002: 1 out of every 50 children is allergic to peanuts in the United States. Over the last 10 years (during which GMOs have become widespread in the U.S.), 1 out of every 17 children in the U.S. developed a food allergy, and hospital emergency rooms across the nation experienced a 265% increase in food allergy emergencies.

In April 2013, the Centers for Disease Control reported that 1 out of every 20 children has developed food allergies since the late 1990s; meanwhile a study published in the Journal of Pediatrics has seen incidences as high as 1 out of every 12 children. Scientists are speculating that by introducing a foreign gene into a plant, it may be creating a new allergen or allergic response in susceptible individuals. Especially now that we know these foreign genes do not “break apart” during the digestion process. Unfortunately, testing of GM foods to avoid the possibility of harm to consumers with food allergies has not been done. Labeling of GM foods and food that contains GM products has likewise not been done. When individual states try to pass labeling initiatives, Monsanto sues them back into silence.

Parallel Increase in Type 2 Diabetes

Over the past seven years, increasing studies are documenting the direct connection between pesticides and a huge spike (as much as 250%) in diabetes. The first study was reported back in 2005 by Japanese scientists, and again in 2008 by the National Institutes of Health; another study by the University of Cambridge corroborated the findings; as did yet another study performed by Stanford University.

By contrast, another study (last paragraph in the article) bolsters the argument: the association between obesity and diabetes was absent in people with low concentrations of pesticides in their blood. Essentially, individuals were more at risk of diabetes if they were thin, with high blood-levels of pesticides, than if they were overweight with low levels of pesticides.

Parallel Increase in Autism

In addition to allergies, another insidious problem is on the rise in our nation’s children: autism.

During the same time period corresponding to the prevalence of GMOs in our processed food — from 1997 to 2008 — the Pediatrics Journal reports a 250% increase in the prevalence of autism in American children — one out of 91 children are now diagnosed with autism.

Once again, there have been no studies linking GMOs to developmental diseases (since studies of GMOs are not happening in the U.S.; see “Emerging Health Risks in Human Studies” below).

Coincidentally (or not), the main dietary culprits reported for autism include soy (the #1 GMO crop), milk (much of which still contains rBGH hormone), food starches (most of which are made from GMO corn), and gluten in all of its forms. Despite the mounting reports, one recent study claims there is no such diet corollary. More studies are now underway.

3. ECONOMIC CONCERNS

Agriculture Subsidies for Food That Makes us Sick

More than 60 percent of all deaths in the U.S. are from diseases linked to unhealthful saturated fat and a cholesterol laden diet: heart disease, cancer, stroke, liver disease, and high blood pressure. The annual medical cost of obesity reached $147 billion in 2008. The Medicare and Medicaid spending for obesity-related conditions now totals $61 billion per year. Heart disease costs $189.4 billion per year and that cost is expected to triple by 2030. Cancer costs $102.8 billion per year. Diabetes costs $128.1 billion annually.

So why is Congress delegating billions of taxpayer dollars to boost the production of the most unhealthy food — GMO meat, hormone-laced dairy, and sweeteners for processed food — while fruits and vegetables receive almost none?

Especially when the beneficiaries of agricultural subsidies (creatively named ‘The Farm Bill’) are the very same corporations that promote GMO crops and convert these crops into high fructose corn syrup, and GMO feed for the cows and pigs who end up in a McDonald’s wrapper, rather than the organic farmers who are raising more healthy food, healthy soil, and a healthier environment.

Corporate Profits Outweigh Public Health

Bringing a GM food to market is a lengthy and costly process. Agri-biotech companies (and their shareholders) have a vested interest in maximizing profits on their investment by conserving expenses. Without any requirements from the FDA, they have no reason to invest money on pre-market human health safety studies.

Corporate Patents Control Farming

All of the new genetically engineered plant technologies and resulting GM plants and seeds have been patented. Patented seeds cost more, and these costs are controlled by corporations focused on maximizing profits. As a result, farmers in the US who agreed to a “better future through GMO crops” and signed contracts with Monsanto must pay royalty fees, licensing fees, and trade fees in addition to the higher cost of GMO seeds they are then required to plant on their farm. And it’s not a one-time cost. The generations-old practice of cleaning and saving a portion of seeds from this year’s crop to be replanted next year? No longer possible… that’s considered illegal patent infringement in Monsanto’s contract.

Farmers are required to buy fresh seed every single year, and new laws against “seed cleaning” businesses are causing these service providers to go out of business — but not before Monsanto obtains their account records in order to track down farmers who are still cleaning and saving seeds.

Corporate Patents Control Nations

The higher cost of genetically modified “super seeds” is typically out of the range of what small farmers and third world countries are able to afford, thus widening the gap between wealthy and poor, well-fed and hungry.

Unless of course Monsanto, the Rockefeller Foundation, and Bill and Melinda Gates step in to “gift” GMO seeds to poor nations (via non-profit organization called AGRA) in order to establish that country’s dependence on Monsanto’s “drug” and thus effectively take control of a poorer region’s economic future (not to mention the future of the population’s health).

Lawsuits Force Non-GMO Farmers Out of Business

Farmers who don’t currently use Monsanto’s patented GMO seeds may face unexpected costs when their crops are cross-pollinated from neighboring GMO fields and Monsanto takes them to court for patent infringement (since Monsanto can’t sue the bees and butterflies actually doing the job).

Monsanto is rallying nearly $50 million in anti-label advertising dollars, and that, combined with an ardent citizens’ rebuttal, has created a surge of public awareness. If passed, Proposition 37 will be a monumental step forward in allowing consumers to make informed choices about food, while setting the stage for other states to follow California’s lead.

Ask yourself: why do the world’s top chemical manufacturers want to prevent you from knowing what’s in your food?

This Article was condensed from an article in GMO-AWARENESS.com for Dee Jensen

Dee Jensen recommends that you review this article to form your own conclusions… (The Case Against Sugar)

Say your child petitioned for permission to smoke a pack of cigarettes a week. Say his or her logic was that a pack a week is better than a pack a day. No dice, right? O.K., now substitute sugar for cigarettes.

Comparing the dangers of inhaling cigarettes with chowing down on candy bars may sound like false equivalence, but Gary Taubes’s “The Case Against Sugar” will persuade you otherwise. Here is a book on sugar that sugarcoats nothing. The stuff kills.

Taubes begins with a kick in the teeth. Sugar is not only the root cause of today’s diabetes and obesity epidemics (had these been infectious diseases, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would have long ago declared an emergency), but also, according to Taubes, is probably related to heart disease, hypertension, many common cancers and Alzheimer’s. Name a long-term, degenerative disease, and chances are Taubes will point you in the same direction.

In “The Case Against Sugar,” Taubes distills the carbohydrate argument, zeroing in on sugar as the true villain. He implicates scientists, nutritionists and especially the sugar industry in what he claims amounts to a major cover-up.

Taubes’s writing is both inflammatory and copiously researched. It is also well timed. In September, a researcher at the University of California, San Francisco, uncovered documents showing that Big Sugar paid three Harvard scientists in the 1960s to play down the connection between sugar and heart disease and instead point the finger at saturated fat. Coca-Cola and candy makers made similar headlines for their forays into nutrition science, funding studies that discounted the link between sugar and obesity.

It’s tempting to predict that Taubes’s hard-charging (and I’ll add game-changing) book will diminish sugar’s dominance, sealing the fate that no ingredient could evade after such public relations disasters. But the history of sugar in this country suggests it won’t be that easy. Here is where Taubes is at his most persuasive, tracing sugar’s unique and intractable place in the American diet.

Start with World War II as an example, when the government smoothed the way for sugar rationing by arguing that sugar was not part of a healthy diet. The American Medical Association agreed and recommended severely limiting consumption. Alarmed by the possibility of an American public that could learn to live without sugar, the industry founded the Sugar Research Foundation to proselytize its benefits. As Taubes sees it, the S.R.F. may have been created in the spirit of other industry-funded research programs — to promote and defend a product — but it helped establish relationships with scientists like the ones recently reported on at Harvard in the 1960s, and it institutionalized an aggressive, attack-dog public relations strategy that remains prevalent and pernicious to this day (tactics that the tobacco industry would also adopt).

With the rise of new calorie-counting dieting fads in the 1950s, the industry responded with a coordinated offensive. Blanketing daily newspapers with advertisements, it argued, successfully it turned out, that since obesity was caused by excess consumption of calories — a calorie was a calorie, dogma at the time — all foods should be restricted equally. Sugar has only 16 calories a teaspoon; why should it be disproportionately demonized?

The 1960s and ’70s saw a similar pattern: another threat in the form of new evidence implicating sugar, another coordinated response.

Just when it looked as if the sugar industry, for all its campaigning, could no longer overrule scientific fact, it was saved by saturated fat. The rising belief that dietary fat consumption was the cause of obesity and heart disease — which had been written about sporadically for decades — suddenly coalesced into fact, shifting the public’s attention away from sugar. This wasn’t planned or paid for. It was just dumb luck. The American Heart Association, long considered unbiased and authoritative, played a crucial role by blaming fat and cholesterol for heart disease. The press, Congress and the Department of Agriculture followed suit.

Then things went totally bananas. High-fructose corn syrup, which is just as deleterious as sugar, got a passing grade from scientists (especially for diabetics!) and went mainstream in the ’80s and ’90s. Same killer, new disguise: Americans were seduced by the sweet stuff all over again. A new category of products presented as health foods, like sports drinks and low-fat yogurt, played a sort of shell game by advertising that the bulk of their calories came from high-fructose corn syrup, without letting on to consumers that this was just another form of sugar. Learning about this made my heart hurt.

So, after decades of scrambled and spurious dietary advice, where are we now? There is a growing consensus in the medical community that a condition known as “metabolic syndrome” is perhaps the greatest predictor of heart disease and diabetes. Signs of the syndrome include obesity, high blood pressure and, more than anything, insulin resistance — which puts a particularly heavy strain on the body.

And what causes insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome? Taubes blames sugar, the “dietary trigger” hiding in plain sight for over half a century. And if he’s right, he could prove its guilt once and for all.

But is he right? Taubes, who no doubt finds the answer blindingly obvious, nonetheless poses the question himself. Is sugar “the primary cause of insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome and therefore obesity, diabetes and heart disease”? His answer: “It certainly could be.” Taubes explains his caution by reminding us that we are no longer dealing with deficiency diseases, like scurvy, which can be solved with a single magic bullet like vitamin C. We’re talking about degenerative diseases, which take a long time to develop — a lifetime of sweets, in other words — and (frustratingly, if you’re out to prove the hypothesis) don’t develop in everyone.

Taubes ends the book with a chapter just for us: “How Little Is Still Too Much?” Herein lies Taubes’s key point, and it’s sort of a life lesson. We will never know for certain. Sugar may once again get off scot-free, because there is no definitive experiment or algorithm that can be developed to remove all doubt, no practical way to know for sure to what extent it’s killing us. The only certainty is that Big Sugar will continue to fight for its exoneration. Faced with more damning evidence, the industry will obfuscate rather than enlighten. It will insist that there are “two sides” to the story, and will corral skeptical scientists — readily available on any subject — to invalidate or at least cast doubt on solid medical consensus.

When it comes to our health, sugar itself might be largely to blame, but the story can’t end there. It’s tempting to think that if we managed to cut sugar out of our diets altogether, the chronic diseases discussed in this book would disappear. But that ignores a whole ecosystem of issues — our patterns of eating and excess, our poisoned environment — that informs our well-being. Put simply: Remove sugar and we’ll still be sick.

Our job here — and not only here, but with everything from tobacco to global warming — is to override the imperfect, long haul to scientific certainty and instead follow the precautionary principle, which means recognizing what’s staring us in the face and acting on it as if our health hangs in the balance. Because it does.

Parents intuitively know that food can impact their child’s behavior and mood. We know that sweets, for example, can cause bouts of hyperactivity. But mood-altering food isn’t limited to sugar – there are other culprits in the snacks and meals that we feed our little ones. The following five foods are the most common contributors to mood and behavioral changes in children.

Dairy – If your child is lactose intolerant or allergic to the proteins found in dairy, you may see changes in her mood and behavior. Many children become irritable, cranky, or aggressive. Children with dairy allergies or intolerance also tend to suffer from frequent colds and ear infections. Babies may exhibit colicky symptoms, whereas toddlers and older children may become inconsolable and irritable.

Artificial Coloring – Many countries have banned artificial coloring due to the detrimental effects these chemicals have on children. Linked to ADHD, anxiety, hyperactivity, and headaches in children, artificial coloring can also cause significant behavioral changes. Because artificial coloring is found in many sugary foods, parents often blame behavioral changes on sugar. Artificial coloring is also often hidden in unexpected foods like bread and yogurt. Avoid products with yellow No. 5, red No. 40, and blue No. 1 if you’re concerned about your child’s mood swings after consuming food with artificial coloring.

Sugar – Sugar can cause a child to be hyperactive, which is often an immediate indicator that sugar is the culprit. However, sugar is in just about everything the average child eats, unless the child is eating a whole foods-based diet. Sugar has been shown to cause long-term health damage, and a diet high in processed foods has been linked to depression, cognitive delay, and sleep problems.

Preservatives – There are several preservatives that may cause behavioral problems in children. They include but are not limited to nitrates, nitrites, and sodium benzoate. Monosodium glutamate (MSG) is a flavor enhancer that also causes mood and behavior changes, including headaches and hyperactivity. Sodium benzoate is commonly found in juice products marketed toward children.

Food Allergens – Common food allergens are dairy, nuts, eggs, soy, and corn. When a child has an intolerance or an allergy to a particular food, it can cause significant health and behavior issues. However, it can be difficult to pinpoint which allergen is making your child sick without the help of an allergist. A food intolerance, for example, is often missed and a child is instead diagnosed with ADHD.

If you notice behavior changes or mood swings in your child, consider keeping a food journal. Track what they eat and when they exhibit concerning behavior. Try eliminating suspicious foods to see if the behavior changes. While food isn’t the cause of all behavioral issues and conditions, it’s important to make sure that your child is not suffering from something that can be easily remedied.